Submitted for the approval of ones needlessly impacted and alternatively spastic cognitive colon:
Occam's razor is errantly used to
adhere, preferentially, to the "most prosaic" hypothesis as the
default one. Bold heresy leavened with bald anti-science! I understand and commiserate.

Seeing equine tracks, we're patronized, "don't theorize
Zebras where Horses are likely." With equal smugness
we're warned, "Don't look for evidence of 'alternative intelligence' in
crop formations where the activities of the misinforming, the misinformed,
or the mentally ill are likely."
I accuse that this is an error of understanding,
employment, and attitude with regard to the Occam meme. Aristotle, it's argued—eminently self-limiting—fails
to deliver on issues beyond the purely mechanical. We appeal, of needs, to a marginalized Plato.

With regard to that "misapplied" Occam, I offer
instead that always satisfying Occam's simplicity is not even what Occam, himself, proposed,
eh? See, it may be that our wrongfully fearful reluctance to
"complicate a hypothesis" is a measure of how much imagination we
lack or even how unbrave we are.
Sometimes, consider: one must complicate the hypothesis, of those aforementioned needs.

Too, BEWARE! Anyone warning about
crossing the line into "fantasy" is missing the point by the
obligatory parsec! See, today's "fantasy"
is ever tomorrow's "reality."

Indeed, humanity "thinks" it, time passes—less
time all the time—and it is "so"!
The point: you cannot easily, accurately or dependably draw the line separating these entities of fantasy and
reality in key considerations, I propose. Further—and "Key"—is the actuality we endure of mistaking reality
for misidentified fantasy, regularly, and so
facilitating the aggregate human misery.

Moreover, the "facts" of reality as opposed to fantasy
seem to have goalposts moving all over the field and even to the other side of trepidation's town... or across the freaking galaxy! It is argued,
too, that fantasy begets reality in
the same fashion that "order" leaps from "chaos." Haldane, remember, said "Truth is not
only stranger than we imagine but stranger than we can
imagine." We're largely clueless as
to even that "imagining," eh?

The ill-motivated employers of Occam alluded to above; however,
remain smug. They are confident that
their unearned, unqualified, and so absurd
hubris will continue to show that their understanding is enough to validate
their worldviews, forever crediting a science ironically enjoyed as a... religion. See, these whistle loudly as they cross our existential graveyard.

It remains, as Terence McKenna points out, "where's it writ large"
that "talking monkeys" are supposed to feel comfortable with regard
to having things "understood" and in tight little bags "all figured
out," ...ever? See, a proper humility
demands we avoid all hubris—not be
too proudly secure in our hypothesis;
at the end of the day that that hubris is likely BS.
In other words, enjoy the "ride" and don't anticipate a
"destination," it's proposed.
You likely won’t get to your destination in the first place and, getting
there, it's not what you would have thought, anyway, in the second. We're better to "Evolve" our
understanding... as we go; enjoy the ride.

Also, do not dare to be bored! The
philosophy provoking our "complicated hypothesis," apropos of a
justified humility, has abundant
validity and vitality. This is to say: more
Plato! Less Aristotle!

...And, I say again, sometimes it is required to complicate the hypothesis! Occam, himself, doesn't rule that out. He
says, "don't complicate without necessity." There's a lot of room to move given "necessity"! Sometime your necessities are
real. It seems reasonable to be on guard for
the path newly traveled in them, as a result.

Crop Circles: Sundry incarnations of
"Doug and Dave," Gaia consciousness, or "crop-circling
Mother-ships"? What do we
know; we're talking monkeys! We're but a few countable breaths from veldt
or savanna and humanity's entelechy is nonexistent
where it is not wholly infantile. Read the papers. This explains our unwarranted smugness. We don't have it together. "We know not," as a species,
"and know not... that we know not."

Suzanne Taylor

To the chase: Suzanne
Taylor! She was a talented character
actor of conspicuous credit in the sixties, even stealing scenes from the likes
of Mary Tyler Moore and Bill Bixby. She
out-cuted Billy Mumy once... That's tough from ANY wheelhouse!

She is, et sig al, a
Summa Cum Laude graduate of New YorkUniversity
and a tireless natural student of an obvious "para-existential." That's right, folks, it's living and
breathing.

More to the point and the exploration of this essay, she is
a producer of compelling film documentaries of significant note regarding these
subjects. Finally, a mature and
intelligently considered woman rather seeing the handwriting on the wall, she
is an explorer of human consciousness and the expansion, elevation, and
enlargement of same. My hat is decidedly off.

With a focused deliberation fully aware that "reach must always exceed grasp," she has the requisite humility to remember,
for all her considerable experience, that she is—as we all are—a "talking
monkey," still... even if a comely one and even as that intrepid ape
bravely reaches for the stars!

Crop Circles? Sneer
at your peril. As the executive producer
of William Gazecki's film, QuestForTruth (2002), a
landmark production regarding these altogether baffling crop formations,
Suzanne Taylor shows that she is aware of the singular mystery they very unthreateningly illustrate. The errant Occam Thumpers alluded to above
ignore abject mystery as the work of a "misinforming" or
"mentally ill" leading a "misled" down the primrose path in
the Crop Circle's regard,
but that seems to be just more whistling passed the graveyard, eh?

See, ss it is well
pointed out in Taylor's films,
where are the failed crop circle attempts?
Where are the expected mistakes invariably made in the construction of
any complicated artifice? Where are
these selfless, anonymous, and genius-class artists of incredible note who
produce the "genuine formation" without recognition, reward, or remuneration?

Finally, what information can be gleaned from these
formations that could be said not to be from the artifice of
humankind, but must be, by its very nature, alien,
or of the... "other"? From
what other?

Enter now Suzanne Taylor's current film, WhatOnEarth—InsideTheCropCircleMystery. Introduced, also, may be just the kind of smoking-gun artifice alluded to last paragraph!

Remembering that truth is stranger than we CAN imagine, and
that an alien entelechy may only be masquerading
as an "interplanetary" or simple "spaceman" so as not to
alarm us regarding their actual if
un-Englishable composition, corporeality, or agenda... as McKenna and Vallee
point out. A question is begged, reader.

How would this conjectured "unspeakable and unutterable
other," vastly superior in every
regard to the point of that same
inexpressibility—and understanding a
nascent humanity only too well—how might this "entity apart from us"
approach an emerging humanity at all?

Presuming, for argument, that it's not like us
and aspiring first for domination, control, and subjugation, preferring for reasons all its own, also, to have us
keep a shred of our self-respect and
sense of security in the exchange... would they know that a singularly
non-threatening contact might be
communicated in something we could eat, implying that it is a nourishing thing, perhaps, and leading
to some kind of new growth?

Further, might they not first go halves on an observation we
have shared, already, about the
nature of a "reality" apropos of that which we, ourselves, have
demonstrated an understanding of... since before
the common era? I present the
smoking gun. Revealed: Squaring The Circle.

A marriage of humanity and the divine...

Simply put, as Taylor takes pains to do so, Squaring The
Circle concerns the process of constructing a square out of any given circle,
using no measurement devices and only
a straight edge and compass... ...where the area of the one is equal to the
area of the other, or where the perimeter
of the one is equal to the circumference
of the other. Because Pi (3.14>) is
what's known as a "transcendental number," it is said to be
impossible to construct with 100% accuracy. Still, we
humans can get close.

Why is squaring the circle important enough to be reflected
in the architecture of all civilizations and at all times? Simply put, it is a symbol of humankind's
relationship with the divine. Man and
God.

It is a marriage of "God," as it's symbolized in
the "circle" and the human being, as symbolized by the
"square." It is a wedding of
the spiritual and the Flesh. It is the
TOTAL reality. As above, so below... ...as above! It's the symbol for the Greek
"agape," or the highest form
of love.

As I said before... we humans can get close. Before 1983, Taylor
informs us, if the literature were combed for such, one could find four or five
abstruse and unpretty methods of Squaring The Circle encompassing
varying degrees of accuracy... most of these are tortured and inelegant or awkward
as already stated... even ugly.

...After 1983?

Worked into the cereal formations of even the earliest circles, Taylor demonstrates,
are currently recognized if jaw-dropping solutions to this age old problem;
moreover, they are simple, they are elegant, and they are beautiful! There's your tell.

Taylor reveals that
some 50 new, very handsome, and graceful ways to Square the Circle can be
derived from these enigmatic crop formations. Let that sink in.

Now, another big tell: Who steps forward to claim authorship
of these astounding solutions to an ancient
old problem? No one, Reader! There are only
the circles, Sir and Madam, enigmatic
circles speaking in a logos that can be beheld as holistic elements in a
language that is breathtakingly
beautiful! Where did we do THAT before 1983?

Consolingly, our fragile
sensibilities protected and accounted for, these glyphs seem to be a
communication with an "other" that can be ignored if too unsettling. They can be laughed at if one feels the need! They can be or marginalized where one is provoked by his intellectual panic to
presume that necessity...

But... for the one able to embody a justified humility! ...For
the one able to imagine a likely
accurate perception of some "lower station" humanity must hold as the
cosmic
is liable to measure these things? Swallow hard and hunker down, reader! Do they not become that existential expression
of just what the Cartesian skeptibunky or reflex-reductionist—faux-skeptic—pretends they want: Extraordinary
evidence supporting extraordinary claims! Smoke THAT, arrogant and officious klasskurtxian swine!

Extraordinary evidence supporting
extraordinary claims!

Verily, these "skeptics" pontificate and proclaim
their baseless antithesis while "not knowing" even more profoundly
than I
don't "know." They, the most titled, the most lettered, the most rewarded,
the best educated, and supported by
the most well-positioned and powerful of us... these won't even look! That's science? No.
That's self-interested and cowardly hubris!

This proceeding is enough and abundant... What else
is great in Suzanne Taylor's monumental testament to the state of the art that
is our inadequate understanding of these seemingly very informative crop
glyphs? What ELSE
could be in there?! Well, much more than
can have a stick shaken at it in under 2500 words, by Crom... but there are
some 20 categories covered in the film; there is potential for abundant satisfaction.

Explored are the strange energies encountered in the glyphs,
their relevance as art, and the misinformation provoking a suspicious
disinterest commonly attributed to the consideration of them. Additionally, one can become informed how
crop circles may be (1) a vehicle for a re-connection to some lost
wisdom of the past, (2) where crop circles are revealed to be, truly, a global
phenomenon, (3) why they seem to cluster in England, and (4) when they seem to
lend themselves to consciousness, hopefulness, and healing! Geometry, (5) as has already been pointed
out, is revealed as extraordinary evidence supporting extraordinary claims, an
evidence leading humanity to efficacious new world views, perhaps! Finally, arrayed are some tentative
conclusions that can be drawn from all the preceding. Breathtaking
stuff! Though, bringing tears to my
eyes, there is one further item...

From what I have been able to see and hear thus far over the
years... ...Michael Glickman, A-List croppie, just may be the absolute coolest
person on the planet. This is in full
recognition that he has confidently and perhaps even accurately assessed most
ufologists as time-wasting "trainspotters." I digress.

Michael Glickman

As a feature in the DVD
extras, Glickman, a very sincere, compelling, and gifted speaker, gave a
tribute/eulogy to the late Doctor John Mack—a Pulitzer Prize winning Harvard Chair holder, psychiatrist, and late-blooming croppie in his own
right—as moving as it was humorous and as respectful as it was insightful. Glickman wept unobtrusively at one point... I
suspect that there was not a damp eye in the packed house. Certainly none at my home where, alone, I
went ahead and got all kinds of "obtrusive." Very poignant, reader, and worth the price
of admission all by itself.

Check him out: http://www.michaelglickmanoncropcircles.com/

Reader! Stop and
think for a minute! We live in the
remotest defilade of some forgotten and backwater corner of a universe so expansive, grand, unreachable, unknowable, ...and incomprehensible that it could qualify as God the "unnamable." Perhaps some thought could be given to
complicating a hypothesis in its regard, or at least be less fearful of
same.

We have self-aware imaginations for just that purpose; we could show a little more courage in their
use. Suzanne Taylor, eminentlysane and seemingly
sober, does not appear to be crippled with that fear. ...And we can take a further lesson, reader:

Be intelligently
and imaginatively brave and mighty
forces will come to your aid.

5
comments:

Can you imagine my surprise when my Google Alert for crop circles led me to this? I thought the cartoon you made for me, that graces my Facebook page, www.facebook.com/CropCircleQueen, was over the top. Are you married? I am yours!!! But so should the world be. This is so intelligent -- the world owes you.

It’s been said that all you need is one other person recognizing you to empower you. I miss having a significant other, as I miss my parents before that, for that kind of support. So, what you’ve done is more comforting to me than you might imagine. It really makes a difference.

Excellent piece of writing! I have often wondered about the blind acceptance of Occam's Razor by the media and mainstream science. It seems odd to me and a symptom of fear, avoidance of damage to comfort zones or intellectual laziness.Reality is a stage set anyway in my humble opinion. Thanks for a great read!

Ive taken this communication quite seriously since I first heard and read about it and have been trying to cleanse or clear my mind of obstacles that might be preventing me from being open enough to see and understand the message. I never seem to run out of my own very simplistic explanations that something is wrong and the messages through the medium is a solution to something we can not or will not recognize just yet. Or, perhaps the refusal to NOT have your cake and eat it too ( at least look at your cake first).Maybe the most simplistic way of show and tell under these circumstances is just not getting through to us as it seems there are consistencies in the message - in my mind anyway - that if we dont surrender the things we covet with absolute certainty and misjudge as good for all, know there is nothing communal in any of it. This way of blind thinking, that if its good for you it's good for everybody is terrible preparation for the things we face.

Highly Descriptive!

For perpetuity?

The Truth Revealed

"Lol! I like you in person.. interesting to talk to, fun to hang out with, you just come off as an ass on the Internets. Can't win them all." Mason Lehmberg [nephew]

Dive In!

"Folks - Alfred's writings are so unlike anything you've ever read, and I mean that in the highest regard possible, that they bear numerous re-reads! I encourage anyone and everyone to dive into his world!!!"

-- Scott Santa

One man's opinion

"You have a way with words, sir..." — Warren Naujalis

Unchanging High Quality

Your grasp of salient points across many subjects and your ability to cut through the bull are second to none... your grasp of the English language is top drawer.

You are a great writer that never changes... a writer and author I aspire to be half as good as.

-- Max Burns

A worthwhile read?

...I'm a fortunate fool and you are winding and weaving at your electronic alter delivering the truth in a manner that puts Jerome K. Jerome and Tom Sharpe to shame... You're far too psychosomagical to be discarded or castigated... Sacha Claire Christie

Ufology's Keith Olbermann

...Ongoing Ufological Jeremiad

Jeremiad — a prolonged lamentation or complaint; also: a cautionary or angry harangue...Doubt what is doubtable. Believe what is believable. Think what you will....I know not what course others may take; mine changes regardless...

Provenance

>>>>"Retired Military Aviator and Failed Public School Teacher, but a person attentive to UFOs and their ancillaries because inattention seems unintelligent, unprogressive, unimaginative, and unbrave." Presently writing frequent commentary for the world at large... decidedly, an acquired taste, but it's strange down the rabbit hole... ...and more to taste than buds...

Aggregate Overview

UFOs are, by definition, change, and point to realities of much more breadth and scope — potential and expansiveness. At the same time it gets no easier to maintain a façade of normalcy for the cowardly denial of a niggardly few. Accordingly, it becomes increasingly more difficult to tolerate these garden-variety "noisome negativists," hubristic piss-wits who laugh up damp sleeves at that which they have no capacity to understand, no aptitude to accept, no ability to incorporate, and no skill to recognize! Consequently, I seek my own questions though the answers offend me, shock me, or shame me. In the first place it's not always offense, shock, and shame. In the second, there is, many times, joy beyond the shame, satisfaction beyond the shock, and fellowship, good readers, beyond the offense. Read on.